TRA ANNUAL SUMMARY OPERATIONAL COMPARISON Manager, Engineering Services

Transcription

1 TRA ANNUAL SUMMARY OPERATIONAL COMPARISON BASIC FACILITY INFORMATION Company Name: Nestle Canada Inc. Contact Information: Technical Contact: Parent Company: Facility Address: Brand Barber Manager, Engineering Services Nestle Canada Inc. 100% ownership 980 Wilton Grove Road London, Ontario N6A 6C5 UTM Locator (NAD83): Zone E; N The facility s NPRI ID: 7182 In 2016, Nestle Canada Inc. London facility, employed about 550 employees (350 full time and 200 seasonal). The NAICS codes applicable to the facility are: 31 Manufacturing 3115 Dairy Product Manufacturing Ice Cream and Frozen Dessert Manufacturing 1 P a g e

2 TOXIC REDUCTION STRATEGY STATEMENT OF INTENT Nestle is committed to protecting the environment. Wherever feasible, we will eliminate the discharge of ammonia and particulate matter in full compliance with all federal and provincial regulations. Our employees are encouraged to participate in all types of reduction activities. The toxic substances associated with Nestle operations are associated with the production support and are not ingredients in the products. Reducing the discharge and disposal of these toxic substances will be an ongoing consideration at Nestle, in addition to being environmentally responsible it also indicates improved efficiencies in our processing operations. Options that are both technologically and economically viable will be implemented at our facility. REDUCTION OBJECTIVES Nestle does not intend to reduce the ammonia usage as majority of the ammonia is re-circulated within the refrigeration system. Any ammonia releases from the system are associated with purging which is a required practice. Should it be found that an improved method of removing the air from the system is developed that is technically feasible an economic evaluation will be undertaken. Nestle does not intend to reduce the PM10 and PM2.5 created during the raw ingredient handling and cooling tower operations. Should it be found that a reduction in the creation of these substances can be achieved Nestle would undertake a technical feasibility study. If there are viable solutions then an economic evaluation would be completed. Nestle will continue to use the cooling towers for chilling but will continue to research other options as they become technically or economically available. TOXIC SUBSTANCES The TRA required tracking of all NPRI substances for the 2016 operational year. Three (3) substances were required to be tracked, quantified and reported for under TRA-Phase II. This included ammonia (total), PM2.5 and PM10. The three (3) substances were reported to the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change under O. Reg. 455/09 through SWIM. TRACKING AND QUANTIFICATIONS The method used to calculate the TRA quantifications was a mass balance approach based on purchase records, monitoring data and engineering calculations. Table 1 is a summary of reported TRA quantities for the 2016 operational year. Nestle Canada Inc. TRA Annual Report Summary 2 P a g e

3 Table 1: Comparison of Quantities Reported CAS Substance Description of Processes that Use or Create Substance Reporting under NPRI Part NPRI Threshold 2016 Used Used Last Reported Value % Change 2016 Created Created Last Reported Value % Change 2016 Contained In Product Contained in Product Last Reported Value % Change Reason for Changes NA-16 NA-M09 NA-M10 Ammonia (total) PM10 PM2.5 Refrigeration System Cooling tower, natural gas combustion, dust collector Cooling tower, natural gas combustion, dust collector Part 1A 10 (MPO) > > % 0 0 N/A 0 0 N/A Part (release) 0 0 N/A >1-10 > % 0 0 N/A Part (release) 0 0 N/A >1-10 > % 0 0 N/A No significant change No significant change No significant change Nestle Canada Inc. TRA Annual Report Summary 3 P a g e

4 COMPARISION OF TRACKING AND QUANTIFICATION No changes were made in the quantification and tracking methodology from 2015 to DESCRIPTION OF STEPS TAKEN TO ACHIEVE OBJECTIVE AND ASSESS EFFECTIVNESS There was no technologically feasible reduction strategy objectives identified for the Nestle facility and as such there was no economic feasibility study completed for the identified TRA substances. There are no objectives to track or reduction targets to evaluate. Table 2 provides a summary of the facility TRA changes and updates which took place in Nestle Canada Inc. TRA Annual Report Summary 4 P a g e

5 Table 2: CAS Changes in Quantifications, Quantities and Plan Updates Substance Quantification Method(s) Used Change in Quantification Method Used Rationale for Using Selected Method(s) Incidents out of the Ordinary Significant Process Change Objectives, Descriptions, Targets Actions Amendments NA-16 NA-M09 NA-M10 Ammonia (total) PM10 PM2.5 Mass Balance/Purchase Records, Monitoring Data, Engineering Calculations Engineering Calculations Engineering Calculations No change Best available No No No change Best available No No No change Best available No No No reduction options were identified to be both technically and economically feasible. Therefore, no options were chosen for implementation. No reduction options were identified to be both technically and economically feasible. Therefore, no options were chosen for implementation. No reduction options were identified to be both technically and economically feasible. Therefore, no options were chosen for implementation. Nestle Canada Inc. TRA Annual Report Summary 5 P a g e

6 Nestle Canada Inc. TRA Annual Report Summary 6 P a g e